Why not the bridge?!

It would be so much easier to write these damn captions if I could stop thinking about the coins…

This is 291/1. And Crawford says its an aqueduct. And then I go read some Wiseman 1998 (“Rome and the Resplendent Aemilii”) hoping for a reference and I get none, but I do get references to other things done by the cens. 179 including building the pons Aemilius.

Wouldn’t Rome’s first stone bridge be more worthy of commemoration than an aqueduct that didn’t even bear the family name?!